IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


&^ 


/.t 


o  4^ 


/. 


£-< 


V 


^o 


1.0 


I.I 


■ii|21    |2.5 
2.0 


118 
Ui 


11:26  i  u 


II 


1.6 


v^ 


/a 


^y. 


'/ 


/A 


fliotograpiiic 

Sciences 
Corporalion 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER  N.Y.  14SS0 

(716)  S73-4S03 


^v 


'^ 


\ 


C\ 


^ 


> 


«- 


'1.^ 


O^ 


IS  I 


4s 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historicai  l^^icroreproductions  /  institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommag6e 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurde  et/ou  pelliculde 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  g^ographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  inl<  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Relid  avec  d'autres  documents 


D 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  Mure  serr6e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout^es 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  itait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  filmdes. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl^mentaires; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  Image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m6thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 


D 
D 
D 
□ 
D 
Q 
D 

n 

D 
D 


Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  da  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagdes 

Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pellicul6es 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  d6color6es,  tachetdes  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tachdus 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Qualit^  in6gale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppldmentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seula  Edition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelura, 
etc.,  ont  6ti  filmdes  A  nouveau  de  fa^on  A 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  filmA  au  taux  de  reduction  indiquA  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


y 


12X 


16X 


20X 


26X 


30X 


24X 


28X 


n 

32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Legislative  Library 
Victoria 

The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  -^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grflce  d  la 
g6n4rosit6  de: 

Legislative  Library 
Victoria 

Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettetd  de  l'exemplaire  filmd,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimde  sont  filmds  en  commengant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  fiimds  en  commengant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaftra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ^  signifie  "A  SUIVRE  ",  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  !n  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
filmds  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffirents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichd,  il  est  film6  d  partir 
de  Tangle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite. 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ndcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mithode. 


,     1 

2 

3 

J                     ■ 

jv      2     ■ 

3 

4 

5 

6 

I 


'-■} 


''     I 


1 


r 

/ 


\/ 


A    REVIEW 


I 


<>i    I  UK 


Halifax  Fishery  Award. 


MOW    IT    STRIKLS    A    I'RFVA'IK    CITIZEN. 


liV 


ALEXANDER    BLISS. 


(A  puition  of  the  matter  herein  contained  has  appeare.l  in  the  Xrw   York  Ifrrahi 
in  Us  issue  of  <  ktolier  21,  1S7S.) 


,83  . 


I 


WASHINGTON: 

K.    HKRESldKl),    I'KINTKK,    [^23    M'.VKNTII    STKI  |;i. 

1S7S. 


<^':feri 


t « 


',  :•  V 


ui  ^ 


^  1 


THE    HALIFAX    AWARD. 


The  annoiiiicement  in  November  last  of  the  award  of  tlie 
Fishery  Commission  was  received  with  genuine  and  uni- 
versal surprise  throughout  the  United  States.  Many  no 
doubt  then  tirst  learned  that  a  Commission  had  been  sitting 
at  Halifax,  having  the  subject  under  consideration;  others 
were  aware  that  some  points  left  undetermined  by  the  treaty 
of  Washington  of  1871  had,  as  stipulated  by  that  treaty,  been 
referred  to  arbitration,  but  had  no  idea  of  their  possible 
magnitude;  while  even  the  best  informed,  including  the  very 
negotiators  of  the  treaty  of  1871,  and  those  most  nearly  con- 
nected with  the  Commission  itself,  were,  it  seems,  wholly 
unprepared  for  the  result — an  award  of  ^5,500,000  against 
the  United  States. 

While  the  public  prints  teemed  with  denunciations  of  the 
chief  arbitrator  and  virtual  umpire,  and  of  the  fact  and  man- 
ner of  his  selection,  it  was  astonishing  how  little  curiosity 
they  expressed  to  learn  the  grounds  upon  which  a  decision 
so  unexpected  was  based,  a!id  how  little  was  said  to  satisfy 
the  curiosity  the  public  might  naturally  feel  on  the  subject. 
Nor  was  tlie  mystery  any  better  understood  when  Mr. 
Blaine,  in  two  speeches  during  the  winter,  communicated  to 
the  Senate  statistics  showing  the  very  slight  actual  yield  to 
the  United  States  of  the  Canadian  in-shore  fisheries  of  late 
years,  and  on  the  other  hand  exhibited  the  loss  incurred  by 
the  United  States  through  the  relinquishment  under  the 
treaty  of  the  duties  hitherto  accruing  from  imports  of  fish  and 


'    vicro.,,,..  tv  J.. 


fisli  oil  tV()ii»  Caiijula,  and  the  correriponditig  gain  to  Cana- 
dians. Not  oven  diti  the  a<lniiral)le  letter  of  Mr.  Kvarts,  of 
May  1«J,  1878,  transmitted  by  tlie  President  to  Coni^ress  the 
followinj'  (hiv — wiiile  showing  nianv  reasons  why  such  an 
award  should  not  have  been  made — at  all  make  apparent  by 
what  process  it  had  been  arrived  at.  Hut  the  letter  alhuled 
to  (h)cuments  transmitted  with  it,  and  these,  it  might  be 
lioped,  would  at  last  furnish  some  light. 

THE    DOCUMENTS. 

These  documents  were  so  voluminous  tliat  it  was  not  un- 
til the  middle  of  duly  that  their  iirinting  could  be  completed, 
and  that  they  were  issued  a.^  Ex.  Doc,  Xo.  89,  of  tlic  House 
of  Representatives.  They  form  altogether  three  ponderous 
octavo  volumes  of  over  one  thousand  i»ages  eacli,  or  3,405 
pages  in  all.  They  consist  of  the  "C^ase"  of  Great  Britain, 
the  "Answer"  of  the  United  States,  and  the  "Kei>ly"'  of 
Great  Britain,  of  a  great  mass  of  oral  testimony  taken  before 
the  Commission,  of  atH(hivits,  exhibits  and  other  evidence 
offered  on  either  side,  of  the  arguments  of  counsel,  and  then 
a  momentous  half  page,  whereupon,  without  i\  word  of  an- 
tecedent explanation  or  calculation,  are  inscribed,  over  the 
sigmitures  of  two  of  the  Comiiiissioners,  "  Five  million,  five 
hundred  thousand  dollars  in  gold  to  be  pai«l  by  the  Govern- 
mt.'Ut  of  the  United  States  to  the  Government  of  Her  Britan- 
nic Majesty,"  and  over  the  8ignatur(U)f  the  remaining  Com- 
missioner is  inscribed  less  than  nothing  to  be  paid  by  the 
same  to  the  same. 

Let  us  see,  now  that  all  is  before  us  which  was  before  the 
Commission,  whether  we  can  at  all  till  u[>  satisfactorily  to 
ourselves  this  hiatus  between  the  closed  case  and  the  find- 
ing, and  whether  we  confirm  the  award  arrived  at  by  a  ma- 
ioritv  of  the  Commissioners. 

THE    liRITISJl    CASE. 

And  first  we  turn  to  the  ''Case"  of  Great  Britain.  This 
is  the  statement  of  her  claim  bv  herself.     As  such  it  niust 


eml)rii('0  all  that  she  intends  to  demand,  or  oxi»oct>!  to 
j)rove.  And,  indeed,  no  exception,  it  would  seem,  eonld  be 
made  to  it  by  reason  of  insnlKcieiun'.  WhetluT  we  consider 
tlu'  variety  of  the  grounds  of  claim  stated,  or  the  amount 
finally  set  njs  it  must  be  admitted  that  Great  Britain  lias  not 
failed  to  do  herself  full  justice.  We  shall  reverse  the  order 
followed  by  the  Case,  and  state  first,  as  the  most  interestiuif 
item,  the  amount  claimed.  This  is,  "in  respect  to  the 
Dominion  of  Camida,"  $12,000,000;  "in  respect  to  Xew- 
foundland,"  !*2,880,000;  or  a  ojross  total  of  SU,8SO,000  is 
what  (Ireat  Britain  claims  "over  and  above  the  value  of  any 
advantaajes  conferred  on  British  subjects  under  the  Fishery 
Articles  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington." 

The  groun<ls  of  claim  cover  thirty  pages.  The  gist  of  it 
is  summarized  in  the  following  sentence  (page  9<!): 

"It  has  been  stated  in  the  [)revious  portions  of  this  chapter 
that  an  average  number  of  at  least  one  thousand  Tnited  States 
vessels  annually  frequent  British-Canadian  waters.  The  gross 
catch  of  each  vessel  per  trip  has  been  estimated  at  ^"),(J0O,  u 
considerable  portion  of  which  is  net  profit  resulting  from 
the  ju'ivileges  conferred  by  tlu'  treaty." 

From  a  statement  furthei-  on  in  the  case  of  Newfoundland 
(page  108)  it  ajipears  that  the  net  profit  is  reckoned  at  twenty 
percent,  which  would  give  -SI. 120  as  the  net  profit  of  each  ves- 
sel. Xow,  although  (ireat  !>ritain  (L^es  not  state  what  propor- 
tion of  this  alleged  net  jtrofit  she  would  think  it  proper  to 
charge  for  the  privilege  of  fishing  in  her  waters,  it  is  cleai-  that 
it  could  not  l>e  the  whole  of  it.  For  if  the  whole  of  the  net 
profit  of  the  operation  were  to  be  absorbed  in  paying  her  for 
the  bare  privilege  of  fishing,  who  would  engage  in  it?  It  is 
not  Great  liritain  that  furnishes  the  ca}>ital  invested  in  the 
vessel  and  its  outfit,  nor  who  pays  the  wages  of  the  crew,  or 
the  running  expenses,  or  the  wear  and  tear,  or  the  inten-st 
on  the  outlay,  nor  does  she  incur,  what  is,  perhaps,  more 
than  all,  the  great  risk  of  the  loss  of  all  tliese.  Xor  does 
rjreat  Britain  even  deliver  or  guarantee  to  the  fisherman  a 
certain  ([uantity  offish  :  all  that  she  su[>plies  is  the  privilege 
of  catching,  if  he  can,  some  tish  within  a  certain  limit. 


4f>470 


6 


WHAT    WOULD    IJE    FAIR. 

Xovv,  what  proportion  of  the  profits  should  (ireat  Mritjiiii 
roceivo  in  view  ofwliat  slie  t'urnishos,  and  of  what  tho  other 
party  furnishes?  Looking  at  it  as  a  oonmu'roial  transaction, 
wViat  proportion  eouhl  the  other  party  afford  to  pay  lier? 
"Wouhl  any  British  or  Cainidian  merchant  undertake  to 
guarantee  to  pay  for  the  privilet^e  in  (piestion,  in  view  of 
liis  outhiy  and  his  risks,  a  sum  e([ual  to  one-fourth  part  of 
the  net  profits,  as  ahove  calculated? 

But  let  us  assume  that  Great  Britain  shall  receive  one- 
fourth  part  of  the  ni-t  profits  at  her  own  calculation  of  them. 
This  would  he  §280  per  vessel.  That  this  sum  is  far  beyond 
the  estimate  placed  h}'  Great  Britain  herself  upon  the  priv- 
ilege is  shown  by  the  fact  that,  when  a  few  years  since  that 
Government  adopted  the  system  of  issuing  licenses  to 
American  fishermen,  the  prices  fixed  by  it  for  these  licenses 
were  as  follows: 

Fn  the  first  year  (1866)  the  license  fee  was  fifty  cents  per 

toi         'he   average   toniuige  of  fishing  vessels,  as  appears 

])y  flicial  British  return  of  licenses  issued  (pp.  197-218) 

does  not  certainly  exceed  sixty  tons.     Thus  the  price  fixed 

by  Great  Britain  herself  for  the  privilege  in  <]uestion  that 

year  was  §30  for  each  vessel.     Four  hundred  and  fifty-four 

vessels  took  out  licenses  that  year.     In   1867  the  fee  was 

raised  to  $1,  or  say  $60  per  vessel;    295  vessels  received 

licenses  in  that  year.     The  next  year  the  fee  was  raised  to 

$2  [»er  ton,  or  say  |120  per  vessel,  the  highest  price  attained. 

In  that  year  oidy  sixty-one  licenses  were  taken  out;  in  the 

next,  thirty-one,  and  the  system  was  then  abandoned.     On 

page  82  of  the  Britisli  case  occurs  the  following  })assage  : 

"  This  St/stem  (that  of  issuing  licenses,)  affcr  heiru/  main- 
tained for  four  years,  was  discontinued  owing  to  the  lU'qket  of 
American  jisher men  to  provide  thenisckes  with  licen!<es" 

The  rate  charged,  had  it  been  paid,  was  evidently  satis- 
factory to  Great  Britain.  If  1,000  vessels,  the  number  whicli 
Great  Britain  claims  avail  themselves  of  her  privilege,  had 
paid  at  and  from  that  time  §120  a  year  apiece,  the  Fishery 


Comtuissioii,  we  tiuiy  i)re8iiiiu;,  would  not  have  been  culled 
into  existence.  Tw(t  hundred  and  eiirhty  dollars  per  vessel 
is  then  more  than  twice  as  much  as  (Jreat  Britain  herself 
asked  for  this  privilei,^'  before  she  eiime  to  bring  in  her  bill 
before  this  Commission.  Two  hundred  and  eighty  dollars 
apiece  for  1,000  vessels  is  ,S2H0,000  a  year,  which  for  twelve 
years  is  ^:},360,000. 

This,  then,  so  far  as  any  iiositive  showing  of  figures  goes, 
is  the  extreme  statement  of  Great  Britain's  ease.  With  the 
exception  of  fixing  the  proportion  to  which  she  would  con- 
sider lierself  entitled  of  the  net  profits  of  the  business — a 
point  which  she  leaves  indefinite — it  is  her  own  statement. 
In  the  case  of  Newfoundland,  further  on,  (page  108,)  she 
claims  one-tenth  only  of  the  net  profits.  The  other  data — 
the  number  of  vessels,  the  amount  of  their  profits,  are  her 
own. 

But  we  have  seen  that  the  total  of  her  claim  for  the 
Dominion  of  Canada  alone,  and  that,  too,  over  and  above 
the  value  of  the  concessions  made  under  the  treaty  by  the 
United  States  to  Canada,  is  812,000,000.  How  is  this  very 
great  difference  of  many  millions  accounted  for?  On  what 
does  this  enormous  balance  of  the  claim  rest?  The  follow- 
ing sentences,  (piotcd  from  the  summary  of  the  "Case,"  ex- 
hibit in  her  own  words  her  method  of  swelling  $3,360,000 
to  >i;i2,000,000 : 


INDIRECT    AltVANTACEf*    TO    AMERICA. 

"These  privileges  profitably  employ  men  and  materials 
representing  in  industrial  capital  several  millions  of  dollars; 
the  industries,  to  the  advancement  of  whicli  they  conduce, 
support  domestic  trade  and  foreign  commerce  of  great  ex- 
tent and  increasing  value.'' 

We  were  told  a  few  years  ago,  upon  occasion  of  another 
international  Commission  c;  lied  to  assess  damages,  how 
monstrous  a  thing  it  was  to  include  in  a  claim  for  damages 
any  demand  whatsoever  for  indirect  damages.  But  when  it 
is  a  question  of  paying  for  advantages,  other  laws,  it  seems, 


8 


govern,  uiul  tlu'  'iitlirril  tnlraiifai/cs  arc  to  he  trat-ed  to  tlio 
utiiioHt  oxtoiit  that  inyt'iiuity  cuii  dcvis*-.  and  tlicir  valiK' cal- 
oulati'd  and  includi'd  '.n  tin-  prict'. 


A    Ni:\V    TIIKUHV    OF    I'KHES. 

"  Tlii-y  (tlicsf  priviU'iros)  also  servo  to  n\ake  a  ne('e>sary 
and  lit-altliful  article  ol"  I'ood  plentitul  and  eluap  for  tlie 
American  nation  I  '" 

The  Aifciit  ot'(»reat  Hritain  here  announci's  a  new  princi- 
ple in  political  economy — one  which,  if  admitted,  will  hrini; 
joy,  indee<l,  to  all  venders.  l>ut  sorrow  to  unlucky  consumers. 
Ateordins;  to  this  new  tlu'orv,  vour  haker  should  hy  no 
means  l»c  content  to  chai'ire  you  for  a  loaf  of  hread  its  mere 
market  value — /.  '.,  the  cost  ot  its  production  with  a  fair 
commercial  protit.  Ho  must  follow  his  loaf  into  all  its  ef- 
fects upon  your  houselic'  *  If  he  shall  find  that  it  proves  "a 
necessary  and  healthful  'U'ticle  of  food,  plentiful  and  clieap 
for"  voui"  family,  he  is  to  make  that  the  aground  for  an  ad- 
ditional  chui-ffe.  If  the  hloom  of  In'alth  numtles  in  vonr 
daughter's  cheek  :  if  your  •<on  wins  laurels  at  school  or  at  l»ase 
hall  after  jtartakiu":  of  it :  if  you,  strentrthenecl  hy  it,  trans- 
act successfully  your  husiness,  it  is  clear  that  your  hakiT  is 
entitled  to  a  percentage  on  the  blessings  and  earnings  (»t'the 
day.  In  short,  the  loaf,  for  which  iie  lias  tliought  liimself 
amply  remuneratetl  at  ten  cents,  is  evidently  cheap  to  you 
at  a  dollar,  and  must  he  paid  for  accordingly. 

"'It  is  not  merely  the  value  of'  raw  material '  in  fish  taken 
out  of  British-Canadian  waters  whicli  constitutes  a  fair  basis 
of  com[>ensation."' 

I  [ear.  all  ye  producers  of  wheat,  of  cotton,  ye  owners  of 
coal  I  Think,  before  you  sell,  nf  all  the  kneading  troughs, 
the  ovens  you  will  call  into  activity,  of  the  wheels  of  industry 
you  will  set  in  motioii,  of  the  happy  hearths  you  will  brighten, 
and  reckon  all  these  in  your  price  I 

"  In  addition  to  the  advantages  above  recited,  the  attention 
of  the  Commissioners  is  respectfully  drawn  to  the  great  im- 
portance attaching  to  the  beneficial  consequences  to  the 
United  States  of  honorabh'  acquiring  for  their  fishermen  full 


9 


tVcedoiii  to  |inrsiif  their  iulvonturous  caHiiiij  witliodt  'nuur- 
rint;  i-onstaiit  i-isks,  itiid  i-xposiui;-  tlu-mst'lvcs  and  tlii'ir  tMlow 
(•(Mintryiiifii  to  tin-  incvitalilc  rt|iroarli  (»t'  uillully  tri'spussitig' 
on  the  I'iii'litt'ul  domain  of  tVit'n<lly  nciirldiors."" 

lii'im-inlttT,  \i'  iii'iidont  lioiisdiolders.  wluit  endless  law- 
suits witli  otlier  dealers  you  may  l)eavoidin<r  l»y  patroni/inu' 
tiiis  excellent  haki'i- — what  doi-tor's  hills  iiii<j:ht  ensue  upon 
less  wholesome  t'ocid  I 

"Paramount,  however,  to  this  eoiisidi>ration  is  tiie  avoid- 
ance of  ii-ritatinu"  disputes,  calculated  t()  disipTu-t  the  pul»lie 
mind  <»l  a  -^itiritiMJ  and  eiiterprisinij  peoj»le,  and  liahh' always 
to  heconie  a  <'ause  of  mutual  anxi«'t_\    and  eiid)arrassment.'' 

Surely  our  dear  Tnele  Sam  will  think  no  nrice  too  exor- 
bitant whirh  will  seeure  to  ins  enterprising,'  nephews  of 
(Jloueester  and  I'rovincetown  such  serene  re*;u!ts  'i  For  what 
a  direful  thin«r  it  would  he:  what  tremors  would  shake  his 
fojul  avuncular  heart,  if,  while  he  were  complacently  con- 
ternpiatinjj;  their  piscatory  enjoyment,  the  l>riti>h  lion  should 
chance  to  roar  I 

TO    J3E   SEKIOLS. 

But  let  us  not  for  a  moment  be  understcnxl  as  seekin-;-  to 
throw  ridicule  u))on  tiie  considerations  themselves  thus  so 
ably  set  forth  in  the  British  case,  and  last  above  cited.  On 
the  contrary,  tliey  are  most  important,  and  such  as  we 
should  hope  wonlt^  aninuite  every  sound  American  states- 
man. Tliat  they  were  thouLfht  to  be  of  jiriiuary  in\portance 
by  the  ,\meriean  ne<;otiators  ot' the  treaty  of  1871  cannot  be 
better  shown  than  by  rpiotiiiiT  the  very  next  sentence  of  the 
British  case  : — 

"It  was  repeatedly  stated  by  the  American  members  of 
the  Joint  Uii2:h  Commission  at  Washington,  in  discussiiiir 
jtroposals  reuardinii;  the  Canadian  fisheries,  'that  the  United 
States  desired  to  secure  their  enjoyment,  not  for  their  com- 
mercial or  intrinsic  value,  biit  for  the  purpose  of  removing 
a  source  of  irritation.' "' 

liut  the  American  neii:otiators  did  not  exi>ect  that  tliey 
should  be  asked  to  pay  on  each  account  separately — twice 
over  lOr  the  same  thing.     The  aJjsurdity  of  tlie  [U'esent  claim 


10 

lies  in  the  fact  that  after  fixing  upon  the  article  to  be  sokl 
its  full  price,  at  the  hisjliest  vahiation,  it  is  sought  to  add 
thereto  v  charjjre  of  more  than  double  tlie  amount  for  the 
inconvenience  it  wouhl  l)e  to  us  if  we  did  not  possess  it  I  If 
we  pay  to  avoid  international  irritation,  the  sum  determined 
upon  includes,  of  course,  the  vahie  of  the  fish  caught,  for 
otherwise  why  shouhl  we  trouble  the  British  waters  at 
all?  If,  on  tlie  other  hand,  we  pay  for  the  fish  caught  at 
their  full  valuation,  that  is  the  whole  of  it— the  beginning 
and  the  end — the  one  includes  the  other. 


INDIRECT    ADVANTAUES    NEVER    COMPENSABLE. 

We  compared  just  now  indirect  advantages  to  indirect 
damages,  but  there  is  in  reality  no  parallelism  between  the 
two.  Indirect  advantages  are  far  less  justly  entitled  to  com- 
pensation than  indirect  danuiges;  for  if,  on  principle,  indirect 
damages  may  not  be  allowed,  yet,  in  fact,  they  are  often  as 
palpable  and  as  demonstrable  as  direct  damages;  nor  are 
they  covered  by  the  compensation  made  for  direct  danuiges, 
since  they  may  often  be  wholly  distinct  both  in  their  sub- 
ject, and  in  the  persons  who  suffer  them. 

But  the  indirect  advantages,  which  nuiy  spring  incidentally 
from  a  commercial  transaction,  are  included  in  and  closed 
by  it.  The  seller  receives  his  sure  price  for  the  article  as 
it  is.  He  cannot  be  a  loser;  nor  is  he  entitled  to  be  a  sharer 
in  the  fiture  gain;  all  such  is  the  affair  of  the  buyer  only. 
The  seedsman  sells  his  seed  as  seed,  at  the  price  of  seed. 
He  does  not  count  the  number  or  the  size  of  the  possible 
cabbages  which   your   cultivation    may  develop. 

ADVANTAGES    TO    GREAT    BRITAIN. 

We  have  thus  seen  that  the  British  case,  which  ie  their 
own  statement  of  their  claim,  and  must  include  all  they  can 
claim,  only  makes  up,  by  actual  show  of  figures,  $3,360,000, 
and  this  by  conceding  to  them  their  own  data,  and  by  taking 
no  account  of  the  deductions  to  be  made  by  reason  of  the 
advantages  accruing  to  Canada  under  the  treaty.     And  what 


11 


•  be  sold 
t  to  add 
for  the 
is  it !  If 
eriiiiiiod 
ight,  for 
aters  at 
light  at 
ffiniiiiiif 


indirect 
een  the 
to  coni- 
n direct 
)ften  as 
lor  are 
mages, 
ir  sub- 

entally 
closed 
icle  as 
sharer 
r  only. 
f  seed, 
issible 


i  their 
iy  can 
0,000, 
akiiig 
<f  the 
what 


are  these?  Here  we  are  able  to  leave  tlie  uncertain  domain 
of  estimate  and  calculation,  and  present  the  actual  statistics 
of  the  amount  of  duties  upon  fish  and  tish  oil  imported  from 
C'anada,  lost  to  the  United  States  Treasury  under  the  opera- 
tion of  the  treaty  for  twelve  years,  with  the  corresponding 
gain  to  Canadians.  The  duties  upon  actual  importations 
for  the  years  1874,  1875,  atid  187(!  (see  page  3,352,  iv,)  were, 
had  they  been  collected,  respectively,  S335,181,  ^355,200, 
and  8332,421.  Applying  the  average  of  these  amounts,  viz.: 
$340,934  to  the  twelve  years  of  the  treaty  we  have  §4,091,208 
as  the  total  of  duties  lost  to  the  United  States.  Deducting 
this  sum  from  !!^3, 300,000  liow  much  is  left? 

Or,  if  we  concede  to  (Treat  Britain  one  full  half  share  of 
the  net  ju'otits  as  estimated  by  her,  instead  of  one-quarter — 
i.  (,'.,  10,720,000— and  deduct  "therefrom  the  above  ^4,091,208 
of  duties  lost,  we  shall  still  have,  as  the  amount  of  any  sub- 
stantial claim,  but  .§2,628,792.  All  the  balance  of  the  $12,- 
000,000  is  1.  ade  up  only  by  charging  over  and  over  again  for 
the  same  thing,  as  looked  at  from  different  points  of  view. 

A    UROSS    INCONSISTKNCY. 

No  account  is  here  taken  of  deductions  to  be  made  from 
the  amount  to  be  awarded  to  (Jreat  Britain  by  reason  of  the 
a<lvantages  accruing  to  the  Canadian  i*rovinces  from  the 
corresponding  privileges  accorded  to  them,  under  the  treaty, 
of  tishinsT  in  our  waters.  It  is  true  Great  Britain  de- 
nies  that  this  privilege  is  valuable  to  them.  But  America 
asserts  that  it  is;  that  the  macjkerel  in  some  seasons  seek  in 
l»reference  our  shores,  and  that  menhaden,  the  best  bait  for 
them,  are  to  be  caught  exclusively  off  oi  .oast.  Whatever 
the  intrinsic  value  of  our  fisheries,  (^reat  Britain  contends, 
however,  that  to  her  sul)jects  of  the  Provinces  they  are  of  no 
use,  beciiuse  they  have  plenty  of  fishing  nearer  home.  But 
when,  on  page  104  of  the  case.  Great  Britain  is  arguing  that 
America  siiould  pay  for  the  use  of  the  Newfoundland  inshore 
fisheries,  although  confessedly  never  resorted  to  by  us,  her 
view  sudcleidy  changes,  for  we  find  the  following  sentence  : — 


12 


"It  is  Jisserter.,  oil  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's  Government, 
that  tlie  actual  use  wliich  may  be  made  of  this  j)rivilege  at 
tlie  j>resent  moment  is  not  so  much  in  question  as  the  actual 
value  of  it  to  those  who  may,  if  they  will,  use  it." 

Oross  as  this  inconsistency  is,  it  is  evident  from  the 
result  that  it  prevailed  in  the  award,  that  a  majority  of  the 
Commission  were  persuaded  to  allow  America  nothini!;  for 
her  fisheries  l)ecause  not  used  by  Canadians,  while  compen- 
sating Great  Britain  for  all  of  hers  whether  used  or  not  by 
Americans. 

Nor  do  we  make  any  account  of  the  £100,000  saved  to 
Great  Britain  annually,  as  it  appeared  in  evidence,  by  her 
beini!;"  relieved  by  the  treaty  from  the  necessity  of  o;uarding 
the  coasts  of  her  provinces  against  American  tishermen,  an 
expense  which,  for  twelve  years,  amounts  to  the  sum  of 
$6,000,000. 

ARE    HER    FIGURES    CORRECT  ? 

We  have  hitherto  assumed  tliat  the  British  case  was  cor- 
rect in  assuming  that  the  number  of  American  vessels  an- 
nually visiting  the  British  waters  was  1,000,  and  that  the 
value  of  the  gross  catch  of  each  was  S5,H00.  Xow,  it  is  to 
be  remembered  that  in  those  1,000  vessels  Great  Britain  in- 
cludes all  American  vessels,  those  resorting  to  the  deep  seas 
for  the  codtishery — o[)en  to  all  the  world — as  well  as  the 
mackerelers,  who  may  pursue  their  prey  near  the  shore. 
But  it  is  well  understood  that  the  encroachments  upon  British 
waters  liy  American  fishermen  complained  of  are  almost 
exclusively  confined  to  the  mackerelers.  [t  is  they  only 
who  can  be  said  to  catch  British  fish.  Xow  the  number  of 
mackerelers  alone  does  not  appear  in  evidence  to  exceed 
300  in  one  year.  la  1(S78  the  number  was,  l)y  British  count, 
25!;  in  1874  there  were  noted  164  (pp.  222-229).  It  is 
only  as  to  this  class  of  fishermen  that  Great  Britain  can 
claim  a  compensation  based  upon  their  profits.  "  The  gross 
I'atch,"  the  case  states,  "  of  each  vessel  per  trip  has  been  es- 
timated at  -1^5, ()00  jier  vessel."  But  an  examination  of  tlie 
exhibits   laid  before  the  Commission,  as  to  the  value  of  the 


g1 
sel 

sel 

ail 


T 


venimeiit^ 
rivilege  ut 
the  actual 

from  the- 
it.v  of  the 
)tliiri<r  for 
i  coin  I (011- 
i)r  not  by 

saved  to 
e,  by  Iter 
g'liartling' 
rrnon,  an 
'  sum  of 


was  coi'- 
ssels  aii- 

that  the 
',  it  is  to 
itain  in- 
eep  seas 
I  as  the 
3  shore. 
I  British 
i  almost 
ley  only 
mber  of 

exceed 
I  count, 
.  ]t  is 
ain  can 
e  gross 
een  es- 

of  tlie 
!  of  the 


i 


13 

gross  catch,  and  taking  the  average  of  so  many  as  1,000  ves- 
sels, by  no  means  bears  out  so  high  an  estimate.  Thus  we 
see  that  the  data  by  which  even  the  sum  of  §3,360,000  was 
arrived  at  must  be  much  pared  down  to  get  at  the  real  facts. 

"IN    RESPECT    TO    NEWFOUNDLAND." 

As  to  the  $2,880,000  charged  separately  "in  respect  to  the 
Province  of  Newfoundland,"'  thus  swelling  the  whole  gran<l 
claim  to  )!i;i4,880,000,  it  really  seems  hardly  worth  wliilo  to 
say  much.  ICvidently  the  command  had  gone  forth  to  those 
liaving  the  matter  in  liand  to  bring  in  a  big  bill.  As  the 
tisheries  of  Newfoundland  are  deep  sea  tisheries,  free  to  all, 
ingenuity  was  considerably  taxed  to  devise  grounds  for  a 
charge  as  to  these.  But  by  dint  of  searching  some  grounds 
were  at  last  hit  upon : 

First.  It  was  remembered  that  besides  the  deep  sea  tish- 
eries, which  Americans  do  use,  there  is  also  along  the  entire 
coast,  as  happily  along  all  coasts,  an  in-shore  fishery,  wliich 
it  is  admitted  Americans  do  not  at  all  use.  But  then  they 
might! 

Second.  The  privilege  is  accorded  to  Americans  res(»rting 
to  the  deep  sea  tisheries  of  buying  bait  and  supplies  in  the 
harbors  of  Newfoundland.  It  is  true  they  pay  for  these  at 
tlie  prices  asked,  and  the  traffic  affords  employment  and 
profit  to  a  large  class  of  the  population  of  the  island  destitute 
of  other  means  of  livelihood,  and  who  suffered  at  its  with- 
drawal in  the  interval  between  the  two  treaties,  t^till,  this 
"privilege,"  too,  must  be  compensated. 

Thin/.  Xewfoundland  being  near  by  to  the  deep  sea  fish- 
eries, serves  as  "  a  basis  of  operations" — a  place  to  put  into 
in  distress,  to  refit,  &c.  And  though  these  incidents  bring 
to  the  people  of  this  seagirt  island  money  and  occupation 
and  intercourse  with  the  world,  they  also  form  clearly  good 
ground  for  a  further  cliai'ge.  In  view  of  all  these  "  jirivi- 
leo-es  "  Great  ]>ritain  thinks  that  over  and  above  the  !?12.- 
000,000  claimed  for  Canada,  she  is  entitled  to  ask,  "in  re- 
spect to  the  Province  of  Newfoundland,"  the  further  sum  of 


14 


$2,880,000 — and  so  by  an  easy  sum  in  addition   we   liave 

$14,880,000. 

ANOTHER    "PRIVILEME"    ALMOST    OVERLOOKED. 

It  seems,  however,  that,  notwitiistandin<j^the  ingenuity  and 
indet'atigahility  of  the  British  agent  and  the  five  counsel,  one 
from  each  I'rovince,  who  aided  him  in  getting  up  the  case, 
one  important  item  was,  after  all,  forgotten.  But  though 
omitted  in  the  case,  it  did  not  fail  to  appear  in  evidence. 
Witnesses  were  exami?ied,  and  schedules  exhibited,  to  show 
the  cost  of  construction  and  maintenance  of  all  the  light- 
houses, fog  whistles,  and  buoys  along  the  coasts  of  the  Prov- 
inces! It  was  not  stated  whether  the  whole  sum  or  what 
proportion  of  it  was  thought  to  be  chargeable  to  the  United 
States,  nor  whether  the  amount  was  included  in  the  $14,- 
000,000  or  additional  thereto,  but  it  was  thrown  in  as  a  part 
of  the  British  claim!  Ridiculed  by  the  American  counsel, 
it  was  not  insisted  upon.  But  who  can  say  that  even  such 
evidence  did  not  have  its  effect  upon  the  result?  The  "  im- 
partial arbitrator"  might  very  well  imagine  that  he  could 
not  go  very  far  amiss  by  splitting  the  difference  between  the 
extreme  demand  of  the  one  party,  and  the  total  denial  of  the 
other.  Whatever,  therefore,  swelled  the  claim  swelled  the 
award.  And  so  we  get  a  glimpse  at  the  manner  in  which 
the  ^'ery  surprising  award  of  $5,500,000  was  arrived  at. 

Such  is  tlie  British  case.  To  sift  and  digest  the  mass  of 
evidence  offered  in  support  of  it,  or  that  which  the  United 
States  introduced  on  its  behalf,  would  weary  the  reader; 
nor  could  we,  within  a  brief  compass,  do  Justice  to  the  able 
answer  of  the  Agent  of  the  United  States,  or  the  admirable 
arguments  of  the  counsel  on  both  sides.  Suffice  it  to  say, 
that  however  the  majority  of  the  Commission  reached  the 
decision  they  made,  it  cannot  be  seen  to  be  due  to  any  de- 
ficieticy  in  the  presertment  of  the  case  of  the  United  States 
by  its  Agent  and  Counsel. 


15 


we   have 


nulty  and 
msel,  one 
the  case, 
;   though 
evidence. 
,  to  show 
he  light- 
he  Prov- 
or  what 
i  United 
he  114,- 
as  a  part 
counsel, 
'en  such 
he  "  im- 
e  could 
i^een  the 
il  of  the 
lied  the 
I  which 
at. 

mass  of 
United 
feader ; 
he  able 
nirable 
to  say, 
led  the 
my  de- 
States 


TTiE   COMMON    SENSE   VIEW. 

But  the  Commission  which  was  duly  constituted  accord- 
ing to  a  previous  treaty,  have  made  their  award.  There  is 
iio\ppciil  to  us,  the  public.  We  cannot  reverse  it.  But 
we  can,  as  individuals,  have  our  opinion  about  it,  and  in 
order  to  satisfy  ourselves  what  that  opinion  should  be  let  us 
look  at  the  question  as  one  still  open. 

WHAT    DID    GREAT    BRITAIN    CONCEDE? 

Admitting  that  it  be  necessary,  or  equitable,  or  politic  to 
make  to  Great  Britain  compensation  for  the  possible  en- 
croachment by  Americans  upon  iishing  territory  claimed  to 
be  hers,  by  what  method  can  we  best  arrive  at  a  fair  esti- 
n\ate  of  what  that  compensation  should  be  ?     What  is  there 
in  history  or  in  business  that  offers  the  most  nearly  parallel 
precedent  or  criterion,  by  which  to  determine  the  nature  of 
that  to  be  compensated  for,  and  to  measure  the  degree  of 
the  compensation?     To  answer  this  question  we  have  first 
to  make  clear  .to  ourselves  what  it  is  that  Great  Britain  gives 
us.     Not  tish,  certainly,  either  barreled   or  salted,  or  even 
fresh,  for  we  must  catch  them  ourselves.     Xor  can  Great 
Britain  claim  to  own  even  the  tish  we  may  catch,  for  if  the 
same  tish  chanced  to  be  some  distance  further  from  the   liore, 
she  could  make  no  claim  to  them.     All  that  Great  Britain 
claims  to  own  is  the  right  to  exclude  outsiders  from  coming 
to  fish  within  a  certain  limit— three  miles  from  the  shore. 
And  this   right  it  is,  which  by  the   treaty  she  waives  as 
to  Americanos;  nothing  more.     Now,  what  is  this  conces- 
sion ?     "  I  do  not  know,"  says   Mr.  Dana,  in   his  argument 
^or  the  United  Statos,  "  what  to  liken  it  to.     It  certaiidy  is 
not  to  be  compared  at  all   to  a  lease,  because  the  lessor  fur- 
nishes everything  that  the  lease  requires."     But  with  this 
grant  there  goes  nothing  visible,  or  tangible,  or  ponderable. 
It  is  a  right'  in  the  air— or  rather  in  the  water.     "  What," 
continues  Mr.  Dana,  "  is  it  like?     Is  it  like  the  value  of  a 
privilege  to  practice  law  ?     Not  quite,  because  there  always 


16 


Avill  be  lawsuits,  but  it  is  not  sure  that  there  will  always  be 
mackerel.  Suitors,  irritated  men,  may  l)e  meshed  within 
the  seine  which  the  privileged  lawyer  may  cast  out ;  but  it 
does  not  follow  that  the  mackerel  can  be.  On  the  contrary, 
they  are  so  shrewd  and  so  sharp  that  our  fishermen  tell  us 
that  they  cannot  use  a  seine  within  their  sight;  that  they 
will  escape  from  it.  But  the  lawyer  is  so  confident  in  the 
eagerness  of  the  client  for  a  lawsuit  that,  instead  of  conceal- 
ing himself  a!id  taking  him  unawares,  he  advertises  himself, 
and  has  a  sign  of  his  place  of  business.'' — (Argument  of 
Hon.  K.  H.  Dana,  Jr.,  p.  1,690-1.) 

WHAT    IS    THE    FAIREST    MEASURE    OF    ITS    VALUE? 

Now,  whether  it  be  to  practice  law  or  for  whatever  else, 
is  it  not  clearly  a  license  that  the  privilege  granted  by  Great 
Britain  to  the  United  States  under  the  treaty  of  1871  more 
nearly  resembles  than  anything  else?  A  license  is  the  per- 
mission granted  by  one  in  authority  to  do  a  certain  act  or 
thina:  which  it  is  claimed  bv  such  authoritv  cannot  be  done 
without  permission.  J)oes  it  not  follow  that  the  compensa- 
tion to  be  nuule  for  this  privilege  would  naturally  be  of  the 
character  and  degree  pertaining  to  licenses,  i  e.,  in  the  form 
of  a  license  fee  payable  by  the  person  who  enjoys  the  priv- 
ilesre?  But  since  in  this  ease  the  authoritv  ffrantinar  the 
license  is  of  one  nation,  and  those  to  whom  it  is  granted  of 
another,  it  seems  wise  that  the  Government  of  the  latter 
should  step  in,  and,  to  avoid  complications  which  might 
arise  out  of  such  a  relation  between  individuals  and  a  foreign 
power,  offer  to  assume,  on  behalf  of  its  citizens,  the  payment 
of  what  should  be  found  to  be  the  sum  of  the  license  fees  pa^-a- 
ble  by  them.  And  because  the  Government  thus  assumes 
to  pay  the  gross  amount,  instead  of  its  being  individually 
collected,  is  certainly  no  reason  why  the  total  compensation 
should  be  greater  than  if  separately  collected,  but  ratlier  if 
anvthing  the  reverse.  Now  we  have  seen  that  (irreat 
Britain  claims  that  1,000  American  vessels  avail  themselves 
of  her  privilege.     We  have  seen  that  when  that  (iovornment 


lts| 
it 
til 
vt.| 

v»| 
wi 


always  be 
ed  witliiii 
ut;  hut  it 
contrary, 
en  tell  us 
tliat  they 
lit  in  the 
f'conceal- 
<  himself, 
unient  of 

E? 

jver  else, 
l)y  Great 
i71  more 
the  per- 
n  act  or 
he  done 
mpensa- 
e  of  the 
he  form 
he  priv- 
iug  the 
in  ted  of 
e  latter 

might 
foreign 
flymen  t 
?s  paya- 
f*8umes 
idually 
isation 
ither  if 

(^roat 
I  selves 
nmeut 


17 

itself  adopted  the  policy  of  compensating  itself  l»y  Tui-nses, 
it  voluntarily  fixed  as  the  maximum  price  of  such  license 
the  sum  of  82  i)er  ton;  that  tiie  average  tonmige  of  the  1.000 
vessels  would  certaiidy  not  exceed  sixty  tons:  that  the  aver- 
age license  fee,  therefore,  would  he  8120,  which  for  1.000 
ves.;els  would  yield  annually  8120,000,  and  for  twelve  years 
would  yield  81,440,000. 

Could  we  more  nearly  approximate  to  what  we  ai"e  seek- 
ing— a  just  compensation  to  (ireat  Britain  for  the  ]tarticii>a- 
tion  l»y  Americans  in  her  fishing  privileges  for  the  period  of 
twelve  years,  than  is  thus  arrived  at? 

THE    DEUUI-'TIONS    To    UK    MA  UK. 

But  againstthisamountof  81,440,000  we  have  to  set  down, 
on  the  side  of  America,  the  sum  of  the  duties  relimiuished 
by  her  for  twelve  years  upon  fish  imports  from  Canada,  a 
suui  which  we  liave  seen  to  exceed  84,00O,OO(»  and  there  is 
also  to  be  set  <lown  the  value',  whatever  it  may  hi',  of  the 
Hshing  ]»rivilege  conce<led  l)y  America  to  Canada. 

After  nudsiuir  these  deductions  there  will  remain  the  sum, 
which  the  C'ommission  at  Halifax  was  instituted  to  as<'ertaiii, 
if  it  existed,  as  due  from  the  Cnited  States  to  (Jreat  Britain, 
and  which  the  British  ('omnnssioner  an<l  the  I'mjiire  found 
to  be  |r),r)0O,0O0. 

TllK    OONSHUUKNCES    oF    THIS    A\VAK1>. 

While  Americanuiy  well  regret  the  loss  of  so  large  a  sum 
of  money,  the  saddest  result,  perhaps,  of  this  award  will  be 
the  shaken  eontidence  of  the  American  mind  in  the  efKcacy 
of  arbitration  as  a  remedy  in  international  disputes. 

UlSTORY    OF    TlIK    CO.MMISSION. 

Already  the  correspondence,  as  subse»|Uently  disclosed, 
which  passed  between  the  two  (governments  resi)eeting  the 
constitution  of  the  Halifax  Commission  produced,  an  un- 
favorable impression,  and  argued  ill  for  a  sjitisfactory 
result.     It  seemed  as  if  one  of  the  parties  at  least  was  ani- 


18 


iMuti'd,  not  so  much  by  the  coiuiiR'tuhihlt'  desire  to  secure 
ill!  impiirtial  arhitrator,  as  to  make  surc!  of  oiu'  who  initrht 
be  ho|>e(l  to  In'  partial.  The  persistence  of  (xreat  Britain  in 
urifiuii'  the  choice  of  Mr.  l^elfosse,  when  it  was  from  a 
Britisli  ('Omniissioner  that  the  suti;gestion  had  tirst  come  of 
the  manifest  ineliiijibility  of  a  Beljfian,  did  not  U)ok  well. 
Her  obstinate  adlioreiu'c  to  his  nomination  as  the  only  one 
she  would  listen  to,  and  her  refusal  to  entertain  the  suifji'estion 
of  any  of  the  numerous  and  widely  various  names  proposed 
by  America  are  to  be  ex[)lained  oidy  by  her  early  determina- 
tion to  fall  back  upon  the  alteriuitive  clause  of  the  treaty, 
so  that  the  selection  should  be  left  to  the  Austrian  Ambas- 
sador at  her  own  court  I 

And  what  is  to  be  said  of  the  double  inconsistency  of  her 
declarinii;,  while  nursiiiij  this  purpose,  that  she  would  not 
accept  for  the  office  any  foreign  representative  accredited  at 
Washitigton,  and  yet  insisting  upon  Mr.  Delfosse.  who  has 
for  years  been  accredited  at  Washington  as  the  representa- 
tive of  Belgium?  Why  shouhl  (ireat  Britain  be  so  confident 
that  the  Belgian  minister  alone  would  be  exempt  from  the 
pre-iK)ssessions  whi<th  she  lield  sufHcient  to  disfpialify  all  his 
colleagues? 

AUSTRIA    TO    CIIOOSK    THE    UMPIRE. 

Tlu'  insertion  in  the  Treaty  of  Washington  of  a  clause 
admitting  the  possibility,  in  any  contingency,  of  the  selection 
of  the  umpire  for  the  Fishery  Commission  being  left  to  the 
Aifsfrian  ministei'  at  fjoii'fon  was  of  itself  a  source  of  ]»ainful 
surprise  to  AnuM-icans.  Of  all  the  Powers,  Austria  is  prob- 
ably the  last  that  the  An\erican  people  would  naturally  or 
voluntarily  select  for  such  an  office.  Her  traditions,  her  in- 
stitutions, and  her  tendencies  arc  all  at  direct  variance  with 
our  own.  As  far  removed  from  each  other  in  sentiment  as  by 
longitude,  we  have  never  been  brought  into  contact  except 
by  a  difference.  There  is  much,  on  the  other  lumd,  in  their 
past  associations,  as  well  as  in  their  present  interest,  to  unite 
her  with  England. 


10 


to  socnr*! 
t'lio  niiijrlit 
Britain  in 
18  from  a 
9t  come  of 
look  well. 
.'  only  one 
iUi(i>:e.stion 

proposed 
k'toriiiina- 
lie  treaty, 
n  Anil>a8- 

icv  of  her 
muhl  not 
redited  at 
.  wlio  has 
spresenta- 
contident 
from  the 
ifvall  his 


a  clause 
selection 
eft  to  the 
f  i)ainful 
I  is  |»rob- 
u rally  or 
s,  her  in- 
nce  with 
eiitas  by 
3t  excef)t 
,  in  their 
,  to  unite 


l?ut  it  was  not  to  an  Austrian  merely  nor  oidy  to  an  Aus- 
trian Premier — the  successor  of  Mcttcrnicli — l)nt  to  an  Aus- 
trian representative  accreditt'«l  at  Loth/on,  that  the  selection 
was  to  be  left.     Nor  is  this  all.      If,  on   <;"eneral   principles, 
an  Austrian  noblenum  would  not  have  l)een  the  tirst  choice 
of  American   Republicans,  as  an  arl»iter  over  an  important 
national  interest,  yet  they  niiiriit  feel  a  Just  confidence  that 
tlie    very    ilisjtarity   of  institutions   would    ju'cunpt   a   true 
Austrian   to   rise  above  any  supposed   [trejudice  of  class  or 
nation,  and  do  us  exact  justice.     I>ut,uidiappily,  Count  Beust, 
the   Austrian   And)assad(U-  at  London,  is  not  even  an  Aus- 
trian, or,  ratiier,  he  is  more  Austrian  than  ttie  Austrians — for 
he  is  a  convert — an   Austrian,  not   by  birth,  but  by  his  own 
choice.     Had  the    American    High    Commissioners,  if  not 
aware  of  the  fact  themselves,  l)ut  turned  to  the  nearest  Bio- 
grapiiical   Dictiomiry,  they  would  have  fouiul    tliat  C'ount 
Beust  is,  bv  birth,  a  Saxoti,  that   he  id^xndoned  his  native 
country  in  the  hour  of  her  troultle,  just  after  the   Austro- 
German  war,  and  went  over  to  Austria  to  enlist  in  the  ser- 
vice of  the  House  of  Hapsburg.     He  was  rewarded  by  being 
made  Premier,  but  a  few  years  later  he   retired  from  the 
Ministry  to  become    Ambassador  of  Austria   at   London. 
Such  was  the  man,  an   Austrian   in    ]>olicy,  a  resident  of 
London,   and   a  soldier    of  fortune,  whom    the    American 
negotiators  suffered  to  be  selected,  out  of  all  the  population 
of  the  Globe,  as  the  person  who  should  designate  the  um- 
pire, to   whom    was   to    be    referred    a    ([uestion    toucliing 
America,  and  one  so  contested,  that  the  Joint  Higii  Com- 
mission itself  had  been  umdile  to  settle  it  I 

THE    MISCHIEF    THAT    CLAUSE    WORKED. 

How  such  a  clause  came  to  l)e  inserted  in  the  Treaty,  we 
have  yet  to  learn.  Was  it  from  ignorance?  or  was  it  from 
ncirligeuce  ?  or  was  it  })urposely  suffered  to  be  slip[)ed  in  as 
a  make-weight,  perhaps,  to  some  supposed  concession  from 
the  otherside,  and  in  the  hope  that  it  would  prove  harm- 
less.    It  is  true  that,  owing  to  a  most  unforeseen  circum- 


20 


HtiiiK't',  licrciiiiirit'r  rcrt'iTt'd  to,  this  ulfcniativi'  claiist'  of  tlio 
treaty  hccainc  only  iioiniiially  operative.  When  the  two  <  Jov- 
ernJiieiits  at  issiio,  came  at  last  to  aii;ree  ot"  theniselvi's  upon 
till'  uiiipii'e,  the  Austrian  Anihussa<hn-,  with  tf feat  courtesy, 
carried  out  their  united  wish.  I>ut  tlie  existi'uce  of  the 
clause  in  the  treaty  had  had  it^s  t'dll  ett'ect.  Tt  had  hampered 
America  in  her  I'tlort  to  secure  an  umpire,  who  miijht  he 
supposi'd  to  1k'  unhiasi'd.  It  had  eticouraifed  Enirhuid  to 
refuse  all  ot"  the  numerous  personaiijes  of  so  various  nation- 
ality, whom    America  suiji^ested,  and  i'nal>led   her  to  force 


u[ton  tis  lier  own  cnoiei". 

But,  while  Kn<;land  was  unreasonahly  |U'essiniy  Mr.  Dol- 
fosse,  we  were  chet-red  to  see  the  ij^ood  tisjfht  nuule  aijainst 
him,  (not  personally,  of  course,  for  the  inteii'rity  and  liiijli 
sense  of  honor  of  Mr.  Delfosso  have  never  Ikh-ii  (juestioiied 
by  those  who  know  him,  hut  on  tliose  ijeneral  grounds 
wliich  i^overn  sueli  selections,)  on  bidialf  of  America.  What, 
then,  was  our  consternation  t"  behold  the  extraordinary 
somersault,  so  ime.\'[tectedly  executed  by  our,  then.  Secretary' 
of  State,  Mr.  Fish,  in  the  closiui^  scene  of  liis  Last  Appear- 
aiu;e,  landing;  him  on  his  knees,  at  the  feet  of  Mr.  Del- 
fosse,  to  beseech  him  to  do  us  this  service!  Truly  here  was 
a  feiit,  which,  for  the  moment,  tairlv  took  avvav  tiie  breath 

7  7  ■  *.  t 

of  us  simple  spectators,  and  it  must  have  been  scarcely 
less  sur[>rising  to  the  performers  themselves.  But  it  serves 
to  show  what  rich  resources  of  unimagined  agility,  a  su{tple 
and  dexterous  diplomacy  holds  at  the  disposal  of  a  Master 
in  the  Art! 

THE    WHOLE    EFFECT. 

Take  it  altogether,  looking  at  the  whole  history  of  the 
Fishery  Commission,  from  its  iiu'eption  in  the  Treaty  of 
Washington,  through  tlie  discouraging  circumstances  which 
attended  its  constitution,  to  the  award  fiiuillv  reiristered  at 
Halifax  on  the  23d  of  Xovember,  1877,  it  may  well  be 
doubted,  whether,  should  Great  Britain  decide  to  pocket  the 


I 


^ 


'list.'    of   flK! 

letwo  (lov- 
iclvos  llpOII 
t  (MMU'tc'SV, 
1*V     of    tllC 

Mlijrllt     1)1' 

Iiii^limd  to 
US  li;iti(»il- 
I"    to    Co !■(•(' 

Mr.  f)ol- 
1"'  iiyaiiist 
iind  liiyh 
iiestioutMl 

grounds 
.  WHiat, 
ordiiiarv 
■^ocrotury 

Appoar- 
Mr.  Del- 
Iiore  was 
e  breatJi 

scarcely 
t  .serves 
u  supple 
I  Master 


'  of  the 
'eaty  of 
s  which 
ered  at 
^'ell  he 
■ket  the 


21 

§;'),.")()(>, (»()(),  the  Auicrican  pcoph-  will  be  soon  attain  disposi-d, 
in  thr  chieri^eucy  of  another  international  dispute,  to  sul)- 
niit  any  vital  interest  to  the  hazards  of  arbitration  as  at 
present  understood  and  |)ractieed. 

INTKHNATIUXAI,    roUKTS    IN    TIIK    I'UTUKH. 

Are  we  Justified  in  witldK.ldin.ii:  from  these  Int«'riniti<)iKtl 
Courts,  as  now  ori^ani/ed,  that  eonti<h'iU'e  in  the  jtistice  of 
their  decisions  which  can  alone  iu(hice  us  to  continue  to  re- 
sort to  them? 

A  Tribunal  to  which  ai'e  referred  interests  which  concern 
nations,  and  of  sucli  magnituth-  that  they  cannot  themselves 
agree  u|»on  them,  shoidd,  it  would  seem,  be  surrouiKU'd 
with  guarantees  and  safeguards,  at  least  equal  to  those  which 
attend  ordinary  courts  of  justice.  International  Connnis- 
sioners  are  now  vested  ai)S()|iitely  with  the  combined  jtowers 
of  Jury  and  of  Judge.  But  while  unlike  ujury,  in  that  no 
restraint  seems  to  Ix;  exercised  upon  the  evidence  to  be  ad- 
mitted before  them,  n(»  nnitter  how  irrelevant  or  delusive, 
on  the  other  hand  they  are  not  necessarily  selected  with  a 
view  to  the  c.xi.erience  and  special  attainments  which 
qualify  a  Judge. 

AliU    TJliOV    JURYMEN    OR    .(UD(iES? 

If  the  members  of  these  (Commissions  may  be  assumed  to 
be,  as  umhnibtedly  they  are,  superior  to  the  ordinary  grade  of 
local  Jurymen,  they  are  after  all  still  but  mortals,  and  not 
utterly  exempt  from  the  impulses  and  frailties  which  per- 
tain to  humainty.  Yet  their  verdicts,  which  are  deprived 
of  the  guidance  and  counterp(jise  ordinarily  imparted  from 
the  Bench,  are  final  and  without  appeal. 

If  in  enlightenment  and  dignity  they  are  thought  rather 
to  pai'take  of  the  character  of  tlie  Judge  than  of  the  Jury,  the 
result  of  their  labors  should  be  announced,  not  like  the  find- 
ing of  the  Jury,  in  a  bare  monosyllable,  or  in  figures  unac- 
counted for;  but  rather,  after  the  manner  of  the  Judge's  de- 
cision, should  I»e  preceded  by  a  review  of  the  evidence,  and 


22 


^^ 


a  lirit't'tvcitul  of  tlir  nuisoiis  wliicli  liiivc  K'd  to  tlMH-oiiclusioii. 
A  judiciul  (kioisioii  which  is  iiimtH'oiiniaMied  hy  iitiy  ^'Xposi- 
tioii  of  tilt'  steps  hy  which  it  is  arrivi'd  Jit,  ivscmiilt's  lathor 
the  senteiiee  of  an  liniuisitioii,  or  the  arliitrary  decree  of  a 
Star  (Mianiher,  than  tiie  delihorate  judgment  of  a  respected 
Trihiinul  of  .luntice. 

A    (JHKAT    OMISSION. 

Had  the  Commissioners  in  this  instance  not  ruthlessly 
knocked  away  the  scaffold ini^,  by  which  they  themselves 
attained  to  so  hiii^h  a  pinnacle,  hut  had  permitted  an  interested 
public  to  mount  with  them,  stop  by  step,  in  the  steep  ascent, 
the  same  broad  view,  vouchsafed  to  them,  might  have  been 
unfolded  to  us  all,  an<l  this  writer  and  these  readers  had  been 
spared  their  presc^nt  pains. 

But  this  defect  in  the  reconl  of  the  Halifax  Commission, 
while  great,  is  not  irremediable.  It  is  still  competent,  we 
presume,  for  the  majority  of  the  Conmiissioners,  with  the  con- 
sent of  the  parties,  which  assuredly  would  not  be  withheld, 
to  gratify  the  panlonable  curiosity  of  a  nation,  mulcted  in 
so  large  a  sum,  while  at  the  same  time  thev  iustifv  therii- 
selves,  by  making  public  the  process  by  which  their  result 
was  reached. 

The  British  claim  was  S14,880,000.  America  denied 
that,  after  allowing  for  the  value  of  the  coticessions  she 
made,  anything  at  all  was  due.  tn  fixing  upon  the  sum  of 
$5,500,000,  which  portions  of  the  British  claim  were  thrown 
out?  What  allowance,  if  any,  was  made  for  America's 
concessions?  After  charging  us  for  the  fish  themselves, 
what  amount  did  they  set  down  against  us,  because  "  they 
serve  to  make  a  necessary  and  healthful  article  of  food, 
plentiful  and  cheap,  for  the  American  luition?"  The  jtro- 
duction  of  the  simple  sum  in  arithmetic — it  must  have  been, 
it  would  seem,  in  addition  and  multiplication  only — per- 
formed by  these  gentlemen  in  the  interval  l)etween  the 
closed  case  and  the  finding,  would  fill  up  a  now  painful 
void,  and  at  once  establish  a  connection  between  the  two. 


d 

Htl 

or 
Bl 
V 

thi 

in 

dij 

foi 

thi 


I 


28 


jnied 
she 
|m  of 
[•own 
hca's 
lives, 
Ithey 

|O0(l, 

Ipro- 
leon, 
jper- 
the 
tiful 


AMENItMI.NT   Ol"     I'HK    UK<'URI». 

The  puhlisht'd  Pi-occcdiiiifs  iiichide  a  Protocol  tor  each 
day.  The  Protocol  of  VVechii'sday,  Novetidier  21st,  1H77, 
Htates  that  on  that  diiy  the  case  was  closed.  The  Protocol 
of  Friday,  Novemhcr  2.*5d  conraiiis  the  award  as  rendered. 
Hut  there  is  no  Protocol  ijfivcn  for  Thursday,  Xovi'nd)er  '22. 
Yet  this  day  can  l>v  no  means  he  lu'ld  to  he  a  'Ins  non  in 
the  calendar.  For  America,  iit  least,  it  was  hit;  with  secular 
importance.  Will  not  the  majority  of  the  Commissioners 
direct  the  Secretary  of  tlu'  (\»mmissi(>n,  who  was  furnished 
for  the  occasion  hy  the  British  Foreign  Otttce,  to  supply 
this  deficiency ? 

Or,  are  we  to  assume  that  the  cipherin<^  of  that  memora- 
hle  day  was  done  in  perishahle  chalk?  or  on  the  treach- 
erous slate?  and  that  it  is  no  Ioniser  letjihle?  Was  a  com- 
putation,  which  involved  millions,  suhmitted  to  accountants 
(oneon  either  side)  whoshould  control  and  verify  its  accuracy? 

Even  one  other  pair  of  eyes  might,  perhajis,  have  discov- 
ered some  slight  hut  pregnant  error — a  <le(nnuil  })oint  mis- 
pla(!ed,  or  too  many  ciphers  l)rought  down.  The  Immhlest 
dehtor  is  entitled  in  a  free  counti-y  to  he  furnished  with  the 
items  of  his  liability.  Kven  iha  school  hoy  nmst  show  his 
ciphering  as  well  as  his  result. 

The  mere  siglit  of  the  actual  Hgures  would  at  once  calm 
the  puhlic  imagination,  now  left  to  its  own  unhridled  fancy 
to  discover,  as  it  can,  hy"  what  charms,  what  conjuration, 
RTid  what  mighty  magic"  the  result,  which  has  been  an- 
nounced to  ua,  was  reached. 

THE    PAYMENT. 

^  The  day  is  rapidly  approacdiing — it  is  the  23d  day  of 
November,  1878 — on  or  before  which  the  American  Govern- 
ment, in  fulfillment  of  her  treaty  obligation,  is  to  pay  over  to 
the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  (imless,  in  the 
short  interval  which  remains,  that  Government  shall  yet 
signify  a  contrary  expectation)  the  amount  of  the  award, 
which,  under  the  circumstances  we  have  seen,  was  rendered 


•24 


'^iirinM,ai.i,r()pnMUHl  I,v  ('.,i,o-,,.ss.  ' 

rt'tlic  rcvcre.l   relativ,.,  wlio  with   ,,n„|..„t   tlirifi  u-.t  I 

1>1<H„I„|  t,„   Ins  „i,„„.rou.  i;„uily,  i;,r  ll„.  ui.rvi.hv.i  l.-n,, 
(acconlM.g  to  the  iaU«t  tliuun-  „f  |,n,,.s,  ,.|„,,,,-     '       ' 


4' 
1* 


1» 


i* 


fH'i 


